Langfer 5

Langfer ‘of Wadgate’ (Suff.), fl. 1066x1086
Male
DWP
4 of 5

Name

Langfer
Langfer 4

Summary

Langfer 5 was among eight co-holders of 15 acres in south-east Suffolk TRE, and Langfer was one of two co-holders commended to Northmann. All the co-holders were free men and retained their estate in 1086, when they held it under Wihtmær as the subtenant of Roger Bigod (Roger 6).

Distribution map of property and lordships associated with this name in DB

List of property and lordships associated with this name in DB

Holder 1066

Shire Phil. ref. Vill DB Spelling Holder 1066 Lord 1066 Tenant-in-Chief 1086 1086 Subtenant Fiscal Value 1066 Value 1086 Value Conf. Show on Map
Suffolk 7,109 Wadgate Langfer Langfer 'of Wadgate' Northmann the sheriff Roger Bigod Wihtmær 'of Norton' 0.02 0.02 0.02 E Map
Totals

Sub-subtenant in 1086

Shire Phil. ref. Vill DB Spelling Holder 1066 Lord 1066 Tenant-in-Chief 1086 1086 Subtenant Fiscal Value 1066 Value 1086 Value Conf. Show on Map
Suffolk 7,109 Wadgate Langfer Langfer 'of Wadgate' Northmann the sheriff Roger Bigod Wihtmær 'of Norton' 0.02 0.02 0.02 E Map
Totals

Profile

Langfer 5 was a free man and among eight co-holders of one of two tiny estates at Wadgate, between the coast and the Orwell estuary in the south of the Colneis peninsula in south-east Suffolk. Langfer and another man were commended to Northmann TRE (to whom all the men at the other Wadgate estate were also commended) and their six co-holders were commended to Wihtmær. All eight men were still present in 1086, by which time all were holding from Wihtmær and he in turn from Roger Bigod (Roger 6). In 1086 the men had one plough on their land but no other details are forthcoming.

It is possible that Langfer 5 was the same man as Langfer 4, the holder of another tiny Suffolk estate TRE, because the name was extremely rare and the estates lay only 11½ miles apart. On the other hand, the men were commended to different lords TRE and there is no evidence that Langfer 4 was alive in 1086, when his estate was held under a tenant-in-chief with no interests in Wadgate. Given these differences and the tiny sizes of their holdings, the shared name is not sufficient to tip the balance of probability in favour of identifying Langfer 5 and Langfer 4 as the same person.